I can't think of a more important geopolitical issue. Nuclear arms proliferation might tie.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]

Maybe twenty years ago, before we had let CO2 get so high. Not now.We are now already well into seeing the effects and worse effects are in the pipeline and unavoidable whatever we do. We can still improve the outcome (if making it less dire is 'improving') but we have to do a lot more and do it as soon as possible. The longer we leave it, the worse off we and other living creatures will be.

I don't understand what we can do about global warming. I don't see government changing and I don't see people changing their habits. Things will just need to get really bad before we wake up, but by then it's probably too late.

That's the stupidity we live with.

Also, I'd prefer to hear from a scientist and not a "blogger". Since when does having a blog make you an expert? It gives this talk less credibility...even though he's probably correct on the general tone of the issue.

Digity wrote:... I'd prefer to hear from a scientist and not a "blogger". Since when does having a blog make you an expert? It gives this talk less credibility...even though he's probably correct on the general tone of the issue.

Is there any real good news about alternative energy? I read here and there about initiatives at other places in the world, but am lacking a wide enough view to know if things are swinging that way at a encouraging rate.

As it is now, I really wish I'd kept it in my pants, 'cause I worry about the lives my children, and grandchildren, will have to lead.

MichaelThe thoughts I've expressed in the above post are carefully considered and offered in good faith.

And friendliness towards the world is happiness for him who is forbearing with living beings. -- Ud. 2:1To his own ruin the fool gains knowledge, for it cleaves his head and destroys his innate goodness. -- Dhp 72

Reductor wrote:Is there any real good news about alternative energy? I read here and there about initiatives at other places in the world, but am lacking a wide enough view to know if things are swinging that way at a encouraging rate.

I get depressed thinking about all this. I often feel a sense of disgust with this world and how we people live. Not that I'm perfect either. At this point I think if anything is going to kill off the human race it'll be global warming...and for what? Profit/greed. Greed truly is one of the three poisons. That's what we're seeing now. We live in a society filled with greed...it's just hard not to feel a sense of disgust about it all. I just hate the state of the world these days....ugh! Anyway, I guess you just need to develop a sense of equanimity towards these things and try and do your best to improve things.

That makes me wonder...what do you think is the best action someone can take to help with the issue of global warming?

I haven't commented on this issue in a good long time. I also haven't really been paying much attention to it lately as the foolish carbon tax idea was abandoned in my country and seems to be a dead issue at the moment. That pleases me.

There hasn't been any statistically significant warming in something like 15 or 16 years. If anything this current solar cycle has been unusually weak and there has been speculation that we could see an extended solar minimum coming in the next few decades. Doesn't matter what us puny humans are doing if the sun weakens, our planet will cool, possibly even throwing us into the next glacial period.

For anybody worried about CO2, please keep in mind that CO2 levels exceeded 7,000ppm during the Cambrian period, and was fairly high at later periods as well. The planet and life on it did very well at these times, thriving, so no worries about the planet burning up. Our current CO2 level is barely flirting with 400ppm. Personally, I'm hoping to see 1,000ppm in my lifetime, since it's what plants crave. That level of atmospheric CO2 will double to triple our agriculture output too, which we may need as we add billions more people to our population.

Digity wrote:That makes me wonder...what do you think is the best action someone can take to help with the issue of global warming?

Best course of action is to do nothing. There isn't a problem. And if global climate ever becomes a real problem I will tell you what will happen, for I have seen the future... I don't expect anybody to believe me, but I will tell you anyway...

Let me start off by stating that we spend some billions of dollars on global warming research every year. It's become a vast industry, involving politics, academics, scientists and business interests that are all heavy invested in it. This level of spending has been going on for a good number of years, wasting tens of billions of dollars up to this point already.

Now, at some point in the next 100 years, people will stop researching and start spending that money actually doing something. A real solution will emerge. Eventually, we humans will build machines that will completely control the earth's climate. The economic and military rewards of such a system make it an inevitability. It would probably cost in excess of 500 billion dollars to get a basic system in place. I would speculate that some kind of mirrored nano-material that could be unfurled in space like sails be used to either reflect sunlight away from the planet, cooling it, or reflect sunlight towards the planet, warming it. With a large enough satellite array of this type, it would be fairly simple to control not only the earth's global temperature, but also to alter the energy of storm systems as well as change storm paths. For less than the cost of some recent wars, my nation alone could have funded such a project. If a dire threat were truly to face the earth, I have no doubt the resources of many nations would be pooled and action would be taken.

So, again I say the best course of action is to do nothing. Unless maybe you want to study engineering and help build such a system one day.

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." -- C. S. Lewis

The Cambrian Era may have had those levels of CO2, but didn't changes happened at a much slower rate then and life forms had time to evolve and develop. Instead, the changes we're making are happening more rapidly. Anyway, you make a good point in that we need to look at both sides, both the good and the bad around global warming. Although, I'm just not as optimistic as you. Typically, when humans are effecting the environment it usually leads to problems. For instance, the ozone hole or polluting the oceans. Can you think of anything from industrialization that has benefited the environment? I can't.

There's also the issue of sea levels. Is that going to be good? If I lived on an island I wouldn't be too happy about that news. Not saying that climate change will be the end of civilization, but I think it'll ultimately lead to more problems than good. Thinking otherwise is probably wishful thinking.

poto wrote:I haven't commented on this issue in a good long time. I also haven't really been paying much attention to it lately ...

Hi, poto,I think it would be great if you could bring yourself up to speed with current knowledge before you say much on the issue, because it's really clear that you are way out of touch. The links I provided in my earlier posts in this thread would be good for an overview.

poto wrote:I haven't commented on this issue in a good long time. I also haven't really been paying much attention to it lately ...

Hi, poto,I think it would be great if you could bring yourself up to speed with current knowledge before you say much on the issue, because it's really clear that you are way out of touch. The links I provided in my earlier posts in this thread would be good for an overview.

Kim

I said I haven't been paying much attention lately... not that I was oblivious.

Fact is, if you look at the data, it's clear there's been no warming for the last 15 or 16 years as I stated... I think the last time I posted about this subject there had been no warming for the last 11 or 12 years, so it has been a while XD

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." -- C. S. Lewis

Since we banned CFCs and with the bulk of them having worked out of the atmosphere, we should see ozone recovering. If you take a look at this chart, it looks like ozone depletion has bottomed out and is starting on a slow recovery.

Digity wrote:Can you think of anything from industrialization that has benefited the environment?

Yes, it has allowed us humans to thrive. Humans are part of the environment, as I do not see us as separate from it. There are hundreds of millions of Buddhists alive now. That's probably more Buddhists than at any time in recorded history. Our world and environment is impermanent, but it pleases me to see that so many of us have a chance at liberation now. Furthermore, industrialization has given us far more leisure time. Of course, this can also be a bad thing if that time is wasted on worldly pursuits. However, for those who are dedicated to the path, it provides far more time for meditation, the ability to give more dana, and time to volunteer helping others. Whereas in centuries past, much of that leisure time would have been spent in labor struggling to survive.

Digity wrote:There's also the issue of sea levels. Is that going to be good? If I lived on an island I wouldn't be too happy about that news. Not saying that climate change will be the end of civilization, but I think it'll ultimately lead to more problems than good. Thinking otherwise is probably wishful thinking.

I find it to be hubris and foolishness to build vast coastal cities and expect them to last forever. Our coastlines are not static. We have been fortunate that our civilization has emerged in a period of calm and stability during this brief warm interglacial period. If you look at the geological history, this stability is not always the case. We humans have the ability to move, not just ourselves, but to rebuild entire cities elsewhere. In my opinion we should use that ability and build more wisely in the future.

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." -- C. S. Lewis

Satellite data is also not alarming. Despite a continual rise in atmospheric CO2, temps aren't keeping pace. Meaning all the models and projections of global warming advocates are wrong and continue to be wrong.

BTW, I see you're still using loaded terms like 'denalist,' which is rather insulting, attempting to compare those who disagree with you with holocaust deniers. I now remember why I stopped replying to this subject. So much unpleasantness... not very conducive to my practice.

Anyway, I'm still not alarmed about man's CO2 output. The reduced solar output has concerned me though. This current solar cycle is only half strength of the normal. Should the sun go quiet after this cycle and enter another minimum, we could see another ice age. I'm fairly sure that solar output trumps any of man's efforts to date.

That's all for me now. Maybe I'll check back into one of these threads in a few more years once the next ice age starts

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." -- C. S. Lewis

Satellite data is also not alarming. Despite a continual rise in atmospheric CO2, temps aren't keeping pace. Meaning all the models and projections of global warming advocates are wrong and continue to be wrong.http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_Sep_2012_v5.5.png ... Anyway, I'm still not alarmed about man's CO2 output. The reduced solar output has concerned me though. This current solar cycle is only half strength of the normal. Should the sun go quiet after this cycle and enter another minimum, we could see another ice age. I'm fairly sure that solar output trumps any of man's efforts to date.

poto wrote:BTW, I see you're still using loaded terms like 'denalist,' which is rather insulting, attempting to compare those who disagree with you with holocaust deniers. I now remember why I stopped replying to this subject. So much unpleasantness... not very conducive to my practice.

Well, I don't like to be unpleasant to people but I value truthfulness above politeness when I am forced to choose. People with your opinions like to call themselves 'skeptics' because that is intellectually respectable and implies reasonableness and open-mindedness. At this stage of our knowledge, however, those opinions can only be based on crass ignorance or be outright lies (see pie chart in link above). Are flat-earthers 'round-earth skeptics'? Are the ID crowd 'skeptical' about evolution? Of course not.If you were ignorant but willing to learn, you would have read the links I presented and taken them on board or asked for more details. You didn't - not last time, not the time before, not this time. That leaves lying (more politely, pseudo-skepticism) or denialism. 'Liar', 'pseudo-skeptic' and 'denialist' are all likely to offend (although you were the one who brought up the parallel with Holocaust deniers, not me) but I can't think of another term that is even halfway accurate.

poto wrote:That's all for me now. Maybe I'll check back into one of these threads in a few more years once the next ice age starts